First thing is remember you are never nearly as perfect as the person you are trying to find. No one is.

Second, be ye not unequally yoked.

Third, character over "hotness".

Fourth, if you actually find a guy who will tolerate all of this ultra defensive reactionary tone to the biblical role of men and women...run. He's been neutered.

Fifth, even though he recognizes number four as modern drivel, he should see you and value you more than anything else in the world. This shouldn't change until a child appears. This doesn't mean you always get what you want. It means he cares for you more than himself.

Sixth, life is full of adventure. Enjoy it! Learn what works for you and what you have that needs adjustment.

Seventh, don't rush anything.

I find your terseness quite difficult to decipher. Would you mind giving a much more detailed exposition of what you're talking about? Thank you.

Six and Seven are probably from a pair of motivational posters. They aren't necessarily bad advice, but they aren't really all that deep or insightful.

The rest of it, I found to be pretty succinct. Any explanation would rob it of this quality. The Fifth one is unfortunate, but I guess is a necessary addendum because all too often people read the submissive bit and run off on tangents so it clarifies the Fourth. The first is the most important. Once you have that one down, I think the second and third will just fall into place.

All the same, I'll bet that when he expands on this I will still be in full agreement with him.

There is the "out of control" part (passion, being sexually attracted (not just a physical thing), having sexual chemistry - stuff you really don't have to have sex to know if it's there... also out of control is the match between the other person's maturity and your when you meet, the other person's decisions - and they *must* be, at least for me).

There is the in control part (getting to know the character, lifestyle, emotional stability, values, maturity; mostly things related to an "intellectual assessment" about the person, and your own decisions).

Matching one with the other is the problem. In our time and culture, what people look for in a relationship is nothing more than friendship, passion and sexual attraction.

I also believed that, but today I see it's like arms and legs to the body. They are necessary for the body in a secondary way. The brain and heart have to be character and wanting to live a life of Christian spiritual growth.

The problem with the "friendship, passion and sexual attraction" thing is that relationships today are, in effect, erotic friendships. But they should be about *family*. The partner we're having the relationship with is to one day be *more* than a fun friend whom we trust and have good sex. This person will be a *relative*. I have just recently noticed how we lost the perception of that dimension that the espouse *is* a relative, and how key it is to how we deal with relationships.

Logged

Many energies, three persons, two natures, one God, one Church, one Baptism.

I don´t there is no reason to argue about the husbands being the head of the family. I don´t think he meant submissive in the way seculars think of submissive. "Go and cook food and clear the dishes". Of course love is the first priority in the family, as always. The first woman was out of man to be a helper, not in material means, but in spiritual as well. There is a reason behind why a wife of a priest often does not work, because her career is to be a helper with love, spiritual guidance and care within the family. If yeshuaisiam meant submissive in a strict way, then of course that will have wrong implications on the orthodox teaching, but I don´t think he meant so. The way a man treats his mother is actually a good way to see how he will treat his wife.

How long have you been here at OCnet, Jovan? Your defense of yeshuaisiam shows very little knowledge of his posting history on this forum.

I´ve been on OCnet for about 2 months, praise God for that I´ve seen a bit of yeshuaisiam postings around the forum, but I don´t know what posting history has to do with the truth within a post.

This was his original post on this thread. Did people start argue with yeshuaisiam because his post was radical and totally wrong, or simply because it was he who posted it?

Quote

"Look at how he treats his mothers and sisters (if applicable). When you decide, remember that this man will be your head, and you'll be submitting to him. If he treats his mother well, he could very likely treat you well. Take into consideration the headship order, and if you can trust him, you'll grow strong in a Christian relationship."

I really pray that we orthodox don´t start to think like this:

‘God, I thank you that I am not like other people—those whose posting history does not look good, and therefore are not able to post anything truthful. 12 I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.’

Forgive me and pray for me, a sinner.

Logged

“Belatedly I loved thee, O Beauty so ancient and so new, belatedly I loved thee. For see, thou wast within and I was without, and I sought thee out there."

I don´t there is no reason to argue about the husbands being the head of the family. I don´t think he meant submissive in the way seculars think of submissive. "Go and cook food and clear the dishes". Of course love is the first priority in the family, as always. The first woman was out of man to be a helper, not in material means, but in spiritual as well. There is a reason behind why a wife of a priest often does not work, because her career is to be a helper with love, spiritual guidance and care within the family. If yeshuaisiam meant submissive in a strict way, then of course that will have wrong implications on the orthodox teaching, but I don´t think he meant so. The way a man treats his mother is actually a good way to see how he will treat his wife.

How long have you been here at OCnet, Jovan? Your defense of yeshuaisiam shows very little knowledge of his posting history on this forum.

I´ve been on OCnet for about 2 months, praise God for that I´ve seen a bit of yeshuaisiam postings around the forum, but I don´t know what posting history has to do with the truth within a post.

But your experience or lack thereof has everything to do with how you perceive truth or falsehood in his post.

"Look at how he treats his mothers and sisters (if applicable). When you decide, remember that this man will be your head, and you'll be submitting to him. If he treats his mother well, he could very likely treat you well. Take into consideration the headship order, and if you can trust him, you'll grow strong in a Christian relationship."

I really pray that we orthodox don´t start to think like this:

‘God, I thank you that I am not like other people—those whose posting history does not look good, and therefore are not able to post anything truthful. 12 I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.’

Pray also that we don't start thinking, "I already know everything; therefore, I won't listen to someone else with much more experience who tells me differently."

And by the way PeterTheAleut, it is probably I who have been discussing tons of things with yeshuasiam regarding other topics

The most sad part is though, Anastasia humbly asked for advice on something which probably is pretty important to her in her life at the moment. And instead we all make it to a battleground of words.

Unfortunately, that's why it's often best to not ask for advice on such personal matters on a discussion forum read by so many anonymous people. Everyone has an opinion, and most of them are worthless.

Jovian, God willing may be tomorrow I will comeback to this when I get the time. in the mean time I will leave you with this about yeshua's post.

when the orthodox Church teaches that husbands are the head of thier wives, she does not indicate that relationship dynamics is founded on how the man relates to the females in his household prior to his marriage. such shaky ground( how a man relates to other females of importance in his life) is not what being the head is based upon, the ground is supreme sacrificial love, for the wife. a man leaves his mother and father and cleaves to his wife. when that happens a man is called into a higher calling: to imitate Christ's love for His Bride The Church.The wife is called into a higher calling of imitating the Church's loving submission to her beloved Christ The Bridegroom. this also is not based on how the wife has related to other males of importance in her life. prior gender relations might have other implications in life but they are not the foundations of what the Christian marriage dynamics is about. his linking the two raised questions because it takes away the fundamentals from the God's given beauty of the Christian marriage. if he does clarify as the church teaches the important link we will all be content, but when things are butchered like that, it will only demean what is sublime, and harms the unsuspecting.

as to the priest's wives not working, i know what you are trying to say, but that reminded me of a conversation between a priest and another man, where a man said about his wife that she does not work. the priest quickly corrected him, you mean she works at home 24/7 who does the household work, the caring for the children, etc... the man was flustered to say the least. the priest simply said, yes my son your wife works long hours than you do in what is perhaps the most important work in both of your lives. do not forget that.

I was in awe of the priest. to put it mildly.

Logged

To God be the Glory in all things! Amen!

Only pray for me, that God would give me both inward and outward strength, that I may not only speak, but truly will; and that I may not merely be called a Christian, but really be found to be one. St.Ignatius of Antioch.Epistle to the Romans.

First thing is remember you are never nearly as perfect as the person you are trying to find. No one is.

Second, be ye not unequally yoked.

Third, character over "hotness".

Fourth, if you actually find a guy who will tolerate all of this ultra defensive reactionary tone to the biblical role of men and women...run. He's been neutered.

Fifth, even though he recognizes number four as modern drivel, he should see you and value you more than anything else in the world. This shouldn't change until a child appears. This doesn't mean you always get what you want. It means he cares for you more than himself.

Sixth, life is full of adventure. Enjoy it! Learn what works for you and what you have that needs adjustment.

Seventh, don't rush anything.

I find your terseness quite difficult to decipher. Would you mind giving a much more detailed exposition of what you're talking about? Thank you.

I kept it short with an intended purpose. What part are you having difficulty understanding? If I find I can elaborate without exciting the sensitivities of those who knee jerk in their responses, I will do my best. If I see elaboration will invite such an “ultra-defensive reactionary tone”, I will decline to elaborate. I have absolutely no intention of having someone who ignores the core point of a statement, focuses on one or two words they do not like and rabbit holes on a bunch of non-points. In truth, I find what I stated comprehensible. What questions do you have?

First thing is remember you are never nearly as perfect as the person you are trying to find. No one is.

Second, be ye not unequally yoked.

Third, character over "hotness".

Fourth, if you actually find a guy who will tolerate all of this ultra defensive reactionary tone to the biblical role of men and women...run. He's been neutered.

Fifth, even though he recognizes number four as modern drivel, he should see you and value you more than anything else in the world. This shouldn't change until a child appears. This doesn't mean you always get what you want. It means he cares for you more than himself.

Sixth, life is full of adventure. Enjoy it! Learn what works for you and what you have that needs adjustment.

Seventh, don't rush anything.

I find your terseness quite difficult to decipher. Would you mind giving a much more detailed exposition of what you're talking about? Thank you.

I kept it short with an intended purpose. What part are you having difficulty understanding? If I find I can elaborate without exciting the sensitivities of those who knee jerk in their responses, I will do my best. If I see elaboration will invite such an “ultra-defensive reactionary tone”, I will decline to elaborate. I have absolutely no intention of having someone who ignores the core point of a statement, focuses on one or two words they do not like and rabbit holes on a bunch of non-points. In truth, I find what I stated comprehensible. What questions do you have?

Wow! You're showing yourself quite full of contempt today. Have you ever thought about how you come across to others?

I don´t there is no reason to argue about the husbands being the head of the family. I don´t think he meant submissive in the way seculars think of submissive. "Go and cook food and clear the dishes". Of course love is the first priority in the family, as always. The first woman was out of man to be a helper, not in material means, but in spiritual as well. There is a reason behind why a wife of a priest often does not work, because her career is to be a helper with love, spiritual guidance and care within the family. If yeshuaisiam meant submissive in a strict way, then of course that will have wrong implications on the orthodox teaching, but I don´t think he meant so. The way a man treats his mother is actually a good way to see how he will treat his wife.

How long have you been here at OCnet, Jovan? Your defense of yeshuaisiam shows very little knowledge of his posting history on this forum.

I find more fault in the responses to what yeshuaisiam posts instead of what he actually states. We can play the “He isn’t Orthodox anymore” card all day, but far too many people here post non-Orthodox opinions which contradict the teachings of the Church everyday who are Orthodox to actually be able to employ that statement. I see no difference.

I also have observed far too often an overreaction to his posts from a variety of people. I find it comical how someone will feign a condition of being appalled at someone else’s opinion, pepper that person with all sorts of disparaging comments and then insist their opinion be heard and accepted. Yes, I know the standard response. “Like You?” Sure, like me, if that helps a person sleep at night, but if you pay close attention, which some apparently purposely do not, you will find my “outrageous” comments are usually the third step. First, a normal comment. Second, feigned outrage. Third, my response to which I am condemned for returning the very thing tossed at me.

A very odd way of debate is conducted here for certain, but I confess I have seen it dozens of times from a variety of people. It’s what I like to call, “debate outside the ability to defend a position” (rabbit hole chasing), or Ad hominem.

Since when did one person’s opinion, because its contemporary and allows them to do what they please, outweigh another’s? Look at LBK, works with icons all the time, has forgotten more than most of us will ever learn about them (this means LBK's knowledge far exceeds ours), but some folks still feel the need, in their arrogance, to debate basic things LBK professes as common knowledge among people in the know. Craziness, but hey, I’m not a liberal minded contemporary and a convert to boot, so I, apparently, know nothing. Or as Michael put it, my opinion is trash. Soap box has been put away…

First thing is remember you are never nearly as perfect as the person you are trying to find. No one is.

Second, be ye not unequally yoked.

Third, character over "hotness".

Fourth, if you actually find a guy who will tolerate all of this ultra defensive reactionary tone to the biblical role of men and women...run. He's been neutered.

Fifth, even though he recognizes number four as modern drivel, he should see you and value you more than anything else in the world. This shouldn't change until a child appears. This doesn't mean you always get what you want. It means he cares for you more than himself.

Sixth, life is full of adventure. Enjoy it! Learn what works for you and what you have that needs adjustment.

Seventh, don't rush anything.

I find your terseness quite difficult to decipher. Would you mind giving a much more detailed exposition of what you're talking about? Thank you.

I kept it short with an intended purpose. What part are you having difficulty understanding? If I find I can elaborate without exciting the sensitivities of those who knee jerk in their responses, I will do my best. If I see elaboration will invite such an “ultra-defensive reactionary tone”, I will decline to elaborate. I have absolutely no intention of having someone who ignores the core point of a statement, focuses on one or two words they do not like and rabbit holes on a bunch of non-points. In truth, I find what I stated comprehensible. What questions do you have?

Wow! You're showing yourself quite full of contempt today. Have you ever thought about how you come across to others?

Other than what I have already offered, the best advice I have left to provide is look for a man who makes you happy and wants to please God. If you can imagine this man being fat, wrinkly, bald or other undesirable conditions down the road, but still see yourself very much in love with that person, it’s a good thing. If not, don’t waste your time. Why? Because most of us end up in that condition eventually. Some faster than others, and without a true, real, solid relationship to stand on, it will fall apart. Want proof? Look at the divorce rates.

I hope you seek God in your search and find what He had in mind for you!

Unfortunately, that's why it's often best to not ask for advice on such personal matters on a discussion forum read by so many anonymous people. Everyone has an opinion, and most of them are worthless.

The problem is not about the forum, it´s a wonderful place help each other to grow in faith and help in several matters. I rather think the problem is with people, myself included.

Remember that I supported the little thing yeshuasiam wrote, as I thought he wrote in a general speaking way on the issue:

Quote

Look at how he treats his mothers and sisters (if applicable).

When you decide, remember that this man will be your head, and you'll be submitting to him. If he treats his mother well, he could very likely treat you well. Take into consideration the headship order, and if you can trust him, you'll grow strong in a Christian relationship.

Didn´t I wrote also:

Quote

If yeshuaisiam meant submissive in a strict way, then of course that will have wrong implications on the orthodox teaching, but I don´t think he meant so. The way a man treats his mother is actually a good way to see how he will treat his wife.

I post this last question, if there was anything wrong in both his post and how I perceived it, then please post me an answer. Regard simply the post, you can deal with posting history. I´ll deal with one day at a time.

Or else I agree with Kerdy, why do we brothers and sisters start to deal with persons within a post rather than the post itself?

« Last Edit: July 03, 2013, 07:40:01 AM by Jovan »

Logged

“Belatedly I loved thee, O Beauty so ancient and so new, belatedly I loved thee. For see, thou wast within and I was without, and I sought thee out there."

Forget dating. Many cultures don't do it. Instead, focus on preparing yourself to be the helpmate God wills. Keep yourself pure in body, mind, and spirit. Trust God to lead and guide you. Pray, fast, and all the rest Holy Orthodoxy teaches.

Unfortunately, that's why it's often best to not ask for advice on such personal matters on a discussion forum read by so many anonymous people. Everyone has an opinion, and most of them are worthless.

The problem is not about the forum, it´s a wonderful place help each other to grow in faith and help in several matters. I rather think the problem is with people, myself included.

Remember that I supported the little thing yeshuasiam wrote, as I thought he wrote in a general speaking way on the issue:

Quote

Look at how he treats his mothers and sisters (if applicable).

When you decide, remember that this man will be your head, and you'll be submitting to him. If he treats his mother well, he could very likely treat you well. Take into consideration the headship order, and if you can trust him, you'll grow strong in a Christian relationship.

Didn´t I wrote also:

Quote

If yeshuaisiam meant submissive in a strict way, then of course that will have wrong implications on the orthodox teaching, but I don´t think he meant so. The way a man treats his mother is actually a good way to see how he will treat his wife.

I post this last question, if there was anything wrong in both his post and how I perceived it, then please post me an answer. Regard simply the post, you can deal with posting history. I´ll deal with one day at a time.

Or else I agree with Kerdy, why do we brothers and sisters start to deal with persons within a post rather than the post itself?

I call it understanding one's posting style so we can understand what he says on this thread within the context of what he's written on this and other subjects elsewhere on this forum.

I really think that dedicated dating of one person isn't always a good idea. This idea that as soon as you start getting to know someone it should be exclusive is just unwise. Get to know people, leave the physical aspect out COMPLETELY and dating multiple people is good and healthy (as long as everyone knows that dating other people is OK). It isn't alright to be making out with Tom Tuesday, then making out with Fred Thursday. Likewise you don't want the person you are dating to be making out with Sally Wednesday and you Friday. Once dating proceeds to physical levels then it should be exclusive. But before it is physical there is no need to limit yourself to one person.

This is really good advice that I'm currently applying to my love life. I used to do "serious relationships" but I discovered that spending years committed (but not married) to just one guy which eventually leads to nowhere is actually a waste of time.

I only ever dated one person, and she is now my wife. With eleven years and counting, it seems to have worked out pretty well so far.

It's the best situation possible and what I believe God wishes for everyone. But it's rare just like any other God's wish on Earth. The sheer amount of factors that have to be in place for that to happen is mindblowing. Be very, very thankful.

Logged

Many energies, three persons, two natures, one God, one Church, one Baptism.

I only ever dated one person, and she is now my wife. With eleven years and counting, it seems to have worked out pretty well so far.

It's the best situation possible and what I believe God wishes for everyone. But it's rare just like any other God's wish on Earth. The sheer amount of factors that have to be in place for that to happen is mindblowing. Be very, very thankful.

Yeah, I would never recommend to anyone to just marry the first person you date. My wife had several boyfriends before I came along, so I certainly wouldn't look down on those who have dated other people. I consider myself very fortunate to not have had to go through a bunch of relationships before finding the right one.